Validation of screening instruments for alcohol and substance use disorders among men and women in Eastern Cape, South Africa

dc.contributor.authorStockton, Melissa A.
dc.contributor.authorMazinyo, Ernesha Webb
dc.contributor.authorMlanjeni, Lungelwa
dc.contributor.authorNgcelwane, Nondumiso
dc.contributor.authorNogemane, Kwanda
dc.contributor.authorNobatyi, Phumza
dc.contributor.authorSweetland, Annika C.
dc.contributor.authorBasaraba, Cale
dc.contributor.authorGreene, M. Claire
dc.contributor.authorBezuidenhout, Charl
dc.contributor.authorGrobler, Christoffel
dc.contributor.authorWall, Melanie M.
dc.contributor.authorMedina-Marino, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorWainberg, Milton L.
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-17T06:19:35Z
dc.date.available2025-06-17T06:19:35Z
dc.date.issued2025-03
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION : Valid Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) and Substance Use Disorder (SUD) screeners are needed to identify and link people to services. We evaluated the performance of several AUD and SUD screeners in South Africa using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI)-5 diagnostic gold standard. METHODS : Adults at primary and tertiary care facilities in Buffalo City Metro, South Africa, were screened by research assistants using the AUDIT and AUDIT-C (AUD), DAST-10 (SUD) and NIDA Quick Screen (AUD and SUD). Nurses administered the MINI-5 to identify AUD and SUD. We assessed the internal consistency, criterion validity, sensitivity and specificity of these tools, stratified by gender. RESULTS : Among 1885 participants, the prevalence of AUD and SUD were 9.5 % and 1.6 %, respectively. All tools demonstrated adequate internal consistency and criterion validity. A positive AUDIT screen (men: ≥8; women: ≥7) yielded sensitivity/specificity of 70.6/87.3 % (men: 78.7/82.6 %; women: 64.8/89.8 %). A positive AUDIT-C screen (men: ≥4; women: ≥3) yielded sensitivity/specificity of 66.1/82.0 % (men: 64.0/78.8 %; women: 67.6/81.3 %). Endorsing the NIDA alcohol use question yielded sensitivity/specificity of 71.1/68.1 % (men: 74.7/59.7 %; women: 68.6/72.5 %). Endorsing either NIDA substance use questions yielded sensitivity/specificity of 80.6/91.7 % (men: 80.8/89.0 %; women: 80.0/93.1 %). A DAST-10 cut-off of ≥ 3 yielded sensitivity/specificity of 71.0/96.0 % (men: 73.1/83.7 %; women 60.0/97.4 %). CONCLUSIONS : The AUDIT and AUDIT-C performed similarly among men and women, although lower cut-offs may optimize performance among women. The low number of SUD cases hampered our ability to draw conclusions about the SUD screeners’ performance.
dc.description.departmentSchool of Health Systems and Public Health (SHSPH)
dc.description.librarianhj2025
dc.description.sdgSDG-03: Good health and well-being
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institute of Mental Health and the University of California Fogarty GloCal Health Fellowship.
dc.description.urihttps://www.elsevier.com/locate/drugalcdep
dc.identifier.citationStockton, M.A., Mazinyo, E.W., Mlanjeni, L. et al. 2025, 'Validation of screening instruments for alcohol and substance use disorders among men and women in Eastern Cape, South Africa', Drug and Alcohol Dependence, vol. 268, art. 112559, pp. 1-14, doi : 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112559.
dc.identifier.issn0376-8716 (print)
dc.identifier.issn1879-0046 (online)
dc.identifier.other10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112559.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2263/102840
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.rights© 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
dc.subjectValid alcohol use disorder (AUD)
dc.subjectSubstance use disorder (SUD)
dc.subjectSubstance use
dc.subjectDrug use
dc.subjectAlcohol use
dc.subjectScreening
dc.subjectIdentification
dc.subjectValidation
dc.titleValidation of screening instruments for alcohol and substance use disorders among men and women in Eastern Cape, South Africa
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Stockton_Validation_2025.pdf
Size:
2.37 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: